It is not often academic research yields much of note in relation to Formula One. However, a bunch of professors at City University, London, have found, amazingly, there is statistical proof that Mercedes adopted the wrong approach from the get-go.

After looking at every team in F1 between 1981 and 2010, they found having two number one drivers in a team is detrimental to both drivers' individual performance.

Dr Paolo Aversa, who led the study, said: “It’s good to hire a top-driver, but his average performance declines when his team-mate has a similar level of prior success.

Dr Aversa also found that neither favouring one driver or giving them equal opportunity had a positive result. The key then is to pick two drivers of dissimilar experience and quality.

He went on: “The first option tends to demotivate both drivers, as the favoured driver tends to relax his rivalry, and the second loses his ambitions as he acknowledges that he will not be allowed to overtake his colleague. The intra-team rivalry of Barrichello and Schumacher at the start of the decade is a good example.

“In the second case where the team promotes internal conflict, the resulting antagonism often leads to the failing of any intra-team collaboration, and eventually triggers aggressive duels that often end with one of both cars crashing. This happened in the recent crash between Hamilton and Rosberg in Belgium.”

There you go, Toto Wolff, lover of management books and these sorts of academic articles, you got it all wrong when you hired two top drivers in the first place. Easy mistake to make, though.

How clear is the air between Hamilton and Rosberg?

The hand-wringing at Mercedes after their Belgian Grand Prix mishap culminated in an orchestrated attempt to draw a line under the saga. Three press releases – one from the team, and then one from each driver (which, in a sign of the times, appeared on Facebook rather than my email inbox) – were issued with Germanic precision. There was only one slight flaw: it was an ill-conceived endeavour from the off.

It all began on the Sunday night in Spa, just hours after Lewis Hamilton and Nico Rosberg had collided at Les Combes. Toto Wolff and Niki Lauda appeared on television immediately promising stern punishment for Rosberg. How a man who does his best to keep these sorts of issues private will have felt about the team bosses hanging him out to dry before they had the chance to properly speak with him is beyond me. (And by the way, how is it that Lauda can be a pundit on German television given his role at Mercedes? If there ever was a conflict of interest…)

Anyway, back to the case in hand. By coming out so strongly against Rosberg, the team left themselves no room for manoeuvre after an incident which was the German’s fault but not overwhelmingly so. This culminated in the bizarre and fairly ridiculous decision to make public that “suitable disciplinary measures” had been taken, without mentioning that it included a fine.

How can the air be clear when Rosberg has been so publicly humiliated? When Hamilton has been left feeling that his team-mate got off largely scot free, given Rosberg is not exactly short of cash?

So far many people, including Telegraph Sport’s David Coulthard, have elected to praise Mercedes for giving us such brilliant entertainment. This is certainly true. But if their ham-fisted handling of their driver rivalry results in another team (i.e Red Bull) nipping in to steal the drivers’ title, I am sure Rosberg and Hamilton’s many fans will be less pleased.

…. (Hamilton + Rosberg) x three Monza chicanes = …

Furthermore, if you were hoping to keep your drivers as far apart as possible, away from danger of crashing into each other, you couldn’t really imagine a circuit worse than Monza. It is the fastest circuit on the calendar, with three long straights and three equally tight chicanes.

Fernando Alonso and Sebastian Vettel have pushed each other onto the grass and Michael Schumacher has made the blood boil of those attacking him from behind.

Whichever driver is behind, there are ample opportunities to overtake. Great news for spectators, not such great news for Mercedes trying to keep both cars on the road.

The FIA has been hoodwinked by the drivers

Safety in Formula One is an immensely honourable pursuit. Professor Sid Watkins, Charlie Whiting and many others deserve great credit for many F1 a sport where a driver has not died for more than 20 years.

As someone who has not been involved in the sport when a driver has died, I am sure I will be criticised for saying this, but too often recently endeavours for greater safety have gone too far.

The decision to replace most of the gravel trap at the famous Parabolica corner at Monza is a perfect example. This is not in any way meant to disrespect some of the drivers who have had enormous shunts there, including Britain’s Derek Warwick in 1990.

But, instead of seeing drivers test the limits in the knowledge that to go off would be hugely damaging to their chances, now we will instead have to witness drivers continually whinging about their competitors exceeding track limits. The stewards and the FIA will have to step in, voiding qualifying laps. It all becomes immensely tedious very quickly.

Do we want our drivers to be gladiators or 16-year-old boys more worried about being hit while riding their bicycle? Surely there is only one answer, and the drivers agree.

Forza Ferrari? Forza Fernando?

The talk in Formula One all year, despite an enthralling title battle between two team-mates, has been of declining television audiences, none more acutely felt than in Italy.

While the new engine sound may have played a role – Italians are petrolheads through and through – Ferrari’s dismal form once again seems to have been the primary cause.

Given how abysmal attendance was in Germany, the great fear is that the ‘Cathedral of Speed’ will be something of a damp squib.

They are offering 40 per cent discounts on tickets (they are already an outrageously expensive 400 euros for a grandstand seat), and in around three-quarters of stands tickets are still available. It could be a bleak weekend for Formula One if even the tifosi have stayed away.

Inevitable questions surrounding Button’s future

Jenson Button has become understandably tired of answering questions about his future. His usual refrain goes something like: “34 is not too old to be in Formula One… I’m faster and fitter than I’ve ever been… I score good points for this team and I’m a world champion – they should keep me.”

All that does not change the fundamental fact that McLaren are looking for a star name. From three years of data comparing Button and Lewis Hamilton, they know the elder statesman lacks about two-tenths of the ultimate pace. They desperately want this two-tenths, particularly with Honda investing heavily in the team on their return as an engine supplier next year.

All this does is leave Button in a situation where he is going to continually be asked the same question (and the team know it) without much hope of a conclusion. That is until Fernando Alonso decides what he is doing.

To be fair, Button does not appear too stressed by the situation (or by Cristiano Ronaldo firing footballs at him while he drives). He knows, as do most of McLaren, that it would be a bold and risky step for Alonso to leave Ferrari, themselves undergoing a huge rebuilding, and hop into a McLaren which has the best engine and is still miles off the pace. The questions will be frustrating for Button again this weekend, but the chances are he will get one more year.